Document file:///D|/Export1/www.netlibrary.com/nlreader/nlreader.dll ...

Document
all that I have said, some thinkers end up turning their back on the whole enterprise of modeling or so
they think.
Models and Metaphors
Page 79
Many of those who reject the idea of economic models are ill-informed or even (perhaps unconsciously)
intellectually dishonest. Still, there are highly intelligent and objective thinkers who are repelled by
simplistic models for a much better reason: they are very aware that the act of building a model
involves loss as well as gain. Africa isn't empty, but the act of making accurate maps can get you into
the habit of imagining that it is. Model-building, especially in its early stages, involves the evolution of
ignorance as well as knowledge; and someone with powerful intuition, with a deep sense of the
complexities of reality, may well feel that from his point of view more is lost than is gained.
The problem is that there is no alternative to models. We all think in simplified models, all the time.
The sophisticated thing to do is not to pretend to stop, but to be self-conscious to be aware that your
models are maps rather than reality.
There are many intelligent writers on economics who are able to convince themselves and sometimes
large numbers of other people as well that they have found a way to transcend the narrowing effect of
model-building. Invariably they are fooling themselves. If you look at the writing of anyone who claims
to be able to write about social issues without stooping to restrictive modeling, you will find that his
insights are based essentially on the use of metaphor. And metaphor is, of course, a kind of heuristic
modeling technique.
file:///D|/Export2/www.netlibrary.com/nlreader/nlreader.dll@bookid=409&filename=page_79.html [4/18/2007 10:30:35 AM]